Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Aura vs Pakku, the Slant community recommends Aura for most people. In the question“What are the best AUR helpers for Arch-based Linux distributions?” Aura is ranked 4th while Pakku is ranked 10th. The most important reason people chose Aura is:
Since the application is written in Haskell, it means that, unless the author went out of their way to subvert the type system, at least some classes of bugs must have been eliminated for the project to even compile, and so at least some basic level of stability is guaranteed.
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Written in Haskell
Since the application is written in Haskell, it means that, unless the author went out of their way to subvert the type system, at least some classes of bugs must have been eliminated for the project to even compile, and so at least some basic level of stability is guaranteed.
Pro Similar syntax to pacman
pacman -Ss ghc
aura -As ghc
Pro Run as Root, Build as a User
makepkg gets very upset if you try to build a package as root. That said, a built package can't be handed off to pacman and installed if you don't run as root. Other AUR helpers ignore this problem, but Aura does not. Even when run with sudo, packages are built with normal user privilages, then handed to pacman and installed as root.
Pro Auto removes build dependencies
Has option to auto remove all unused build dependencies.
Pro Wraps pacman
Installation or updates of official or aur packages can all be done with pakku.
Pro Uses pacman interface
Easy to use for anyone familiar with pacman.
Cons
Con aura is difficult to use for system upgrade.
sudo aura -Syu
searches for .sig files for each repository.
.Sig files are not used with pacman
